MOT16 Results

Click on a measure to sort the table accordingly. See below for a more detailed description.


Showing only entries that use public detections!

TrackerAvg RankMOTAIDF1MTMLFPFNID Sw.FragHzDetector
DS_v2
1. using public detections
19.0
59.3
±12.9
57.524.2% 29.1% 7,46565,810887 (13.9)2,738 (42.8)39.4Public
Anonymous submission
DpTrack
2. using public detections
28.1
56.5
±18.5
45.022.7% 30.8% 8,14968,8402,387 (38.3)2,930 (47.1)4.9Public
Anonymous submission
MHT___ReID
3. using public detections
30.9
56.4
±11.6
54.239.7% 17.4% 23,79154,1691,478 (21.0)1,547 (22.0)0.5Public
Anonymous submission
MTT_TPR
4. using public detections
25.9
54.9
±11.7
53.118.7% 34.8% 4,13076,6731,447 (25.0)3,693 (63.7)6.7Public
Anonymous submission
HDTR
5. using public detections
19.3
53.6
±8.7
46.621.2% 37.0% 4,71479,353618 (10.9)833 (14.7)3.6Public
TPM
6. using public detections
26.1
51.3
±9.3
47.918.7% 40.8% 2,70185,504569 (10.7)707 (13.3)0.8Public
Anonymous submission
UTA
7. online method using public detections
29.8
50.6
±7.9
50.418.3% 33.5% 7,75281,584722 (13.1)2,196 (39.7)5.0Public
Anonymous submission
PV
8. online method using public detections
33.0
50.4
±10.1
50.814.9% 38.9% 2,60086,7801,061 (20.2)3,181 (60.7)7.3Public
Anonymous submission
CRF_TRACK
9. using public detections
22.1
50.3
±7.9
54.418.3% 35.7% 7,14882,746702 (12.9)1,387 (25.4)1.5Public
Anonymous submission
CRFTrack16
10. using public detections
22.8
50.3
±7.9
54.418.3% 35.7% 7,14882,746702 (12.9)1,387 (25.4)1.5Public
Anonymous submission
TrackerAvg RankMOTAIDF1MTMLFPFNID Sw.FragHzDetector
ENFT16
11. using public detections
22.2
50.3
±8.3
55.019.2% 39.8% 8,34181,843490 (8.9)754 (13.7)0.4Public
BUAA
MEN
12. online method using public detections
29.3
50.0
±9.1
52.815.0% 37.0% 6,11784,271706 (13.1)1,797 (33.4)2.0Public
Anonymous submission
pairwise16
13. using public detections
23.9
50.0
±65.9
52.419.4% 38.7% 10,99579,568628 (11.1)939 (16.7)22.3Public
Anonymous submission
ENFT
14. using public detections
18.4
50.0
±8.2
54.617.8% 41.1% 8,21482,541479 (8.8)724 (13.2)22.3Public
Anonymous submission
RTT
15. online method using public detections
34.3
49.9
±8.0
49.319.0% 32.8% 9,92780,406955 (17.1)2,247 (40.2)1.8Public
Anonymous submission
CMT16
16. using public detections
19.1
49.8
±9.0
59.216.6% 43.6% 9,22981,882365 (6.6)617 (11.2)6.3Public
#Submission: TCSVT-02964-2019
NOTA
17. using public detections
24.0
49.8
±8.3
55.317.9% 37.7% 7,24883,614614 (11.3)1,372 (25.3)19.2Public
BMVC 2019 Submition 298
siameseCos
18. using public detections
28.8
49.4
±8.4
49.819.1% 39.4% 6,28185,384679 (12.8)823 (15.5)0.8Public
In preparation
STCG
19. using public detections
25.8
49.3
±8.6
52.016.2% 41.4% 6,88684,979515 (9.6)775 (14.5)22.3Public
Anonymous submission
HCC
20. using public detections
23.1
49.3
±10.2
50.717.8% 39.9% 5,33386,795391 (7.5)535 (10.2)0.8Public
L. Ma, S. Tang, M. Black, L. Gool. Customized Multi-Person Tracker. In Computer Vision -- ACCV 2018, 2018.
TrackerAvg RankMOTAIDF1MTMLFPFNID Sw.FragHzDetector
LSST16O
21. online method using public detections
32.7
49.2
±10.2
56.513.4% 41.4% 7,18784,875606 (11.3)2,497 (46.7)2.0Public
Anonymous submission
eTC
22. using public detections
26.7
49.2
±9.1
56.117.3% 40.3% 8,40083,702606 (11.2)882 (16.3)0.7Public
G. Wang, Y. Wang, H. Zhang, R. Gu, J. Hwang. Exploit the Connectivity: Multi-Object Tracking with TrackletNet. In arXiv preprint arXiv:1811.07258, 2018.
AFN
23. using public detections
28.7
49.0
±10.2
48.219.1% 35.7% 9,50882,506899 (16.4)1,383 (25.3)0.6Public
H. Shen, L. Huang, C. Huang, W. Xu. Tracklet Association Tracker: An End-to-End Learning-based Association Approach for Multi-Object Tracking. In CoRR, 2018.
CRF_RNN16
24. using public detections
24.4
49.0
±7.2
53.918.1% 35.8% 8,49583,838621 (11.5)1,252 (23.2)1.5Public
Anonymous submission
DAST
25. online method using public detections
27.9
48.9
±8.4
53.215.2% 36.2% 9,98782,427838 (15.3)1,936 (35.3)8.7Public
Anonymous submission
KCF16
26. online method using public detections
35.3
48.8
±9.6
47.215.8% 38.1% 5,87586,567906 (17.3)1,116 (21.2)0.1Public
P. Chu, H. Fan, C. Tan, H. Ling. Online Multi-Object Tracking with Instance-Aware Tracker and Dynamic Model Refreshment. In WACV, 2019.
LMP
27. using public detections
26.8
48.8
±9.8
51.318.2% 40.1% 6,65486,245481 (9.1)595 (11.3)0.5Public
S. Tang, M. Andriluka, B. Andres, B. Schiele. Multiple People Tracking with Lifted Multicut and Person Re-identification. In CVPR, 2017.
DeepMP16
28. using public detections
24.3
48.7
±10.3
50.115.0% 43.6% 4,11188,862535 (10.4)873 (17.0)9.9Public
Anonymous submission
TLMHT
29. using public detections
28.5
48.7
±8.6
55.315.7% 44.5% 6,63286,504413 (7.9)642 (12.2)4.8Public
H. Sheng, J. Chen, Y. Zhang, W. Ke, Z. Xiong, J. Yu. Iterative Multiple Hypothesis Tracking with Tracklet-level Association. In IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology, 2018.
AOReid
30. online method using public detections
28.8
48.2
±8.7
50.815.3% 36.8% 10,28383,301821 (15.1)1,963 (36.1)11.2Public
Anonymous submission
TrackerAvg RankMOTAIDF1MTMLFPFNID Sw.FragHzDetector
GCRA
31. using public detections
32.6
48.2
±8.3
48.612.9% 41.1% 5,10488,586821 (16.0)1,117 (21.7)2.8Public
C. Ma, C. Yang, F. Yang, Y. Zhuang, Z. Zhang, H. Jia, X. Xie. Trajectory Factory: Tracklet Cleaving and Re-connection by Deep Siamese Bi-GRU for Multiple Object Tracking. In ICME, 2018.
SRPN16
32. online method using public detections
38.3
48.2
±8.5
51.314.2% 36.8% 7,76785,973790 (14.9)2,006 (38.0)1.4Public
Anonymous submission
FWT
33. using public detections
35.4
47.8
±9.4
44.319.1% 38.2% 8,88685,487852 (16.0)1,534 (28.9)0.6Public
R. Henschel, L. Leal-Taixé, D. Cremers, B. Rosenhahn. Fusion of Head and Full-Body Detectors for Multi-Object Tracking. In Trajnet CVPRW, 2018.
MOTDT
34. online method using public detections
33.8
47.6
±8.2
50.915.2% 38.3% 9,25385,431792 (14.9)1,858 (35.0)20.6Public
C. Long, A. Haizhou, Z. Zijie, S. Chong. Real-time Multiple People Tracking with Deeply Learned Candidate Selection and Person Re-identification. In ICME, 2018.
NLLMPa
35. using public detections
29.1
47.6
±10.6
47.317.0% 40.4% 5,84489,093629 (12.3)768 (15.0)8.3Public
E. Levinkov, J. Uhrig, S. Tang, M. Omran, E. Insafutdinov, A. Kirillov, C. Rother, T. Brox, B. Schiele, B. Andres. Joint Graph Decomposition and Node Labeling: Problem, Algorithms, Applications. In CVPR, 2017.
EAGS16
36. using public detections
26.4
47.4
±10.4
50.117.3% 42.7% 8,36986,931575 (11.0)913 (17.5)197.3Public
H. Sheng, X. Zhang, Y. Zhang, Y. Wu, J. Chen. Enhanced Association with Supervoxels in Multiple Hypothesis Tracking. In IEEE Access, 2018.
JCSTD
37. online method using public detections
38.8
47.4
±8.3
41.114.4% 36.4% 8,07686,6381,266 (24.1)2,697 (51.4)8.8Public
W. Tian, M. Lauer, L. Chen. Online Multi-Object Tracking Using Joint Domain Information in Traffic Scenarios. In IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 2019.
ASTT
38. using public detections
30.4
47.2
±9.6
44.316.3% 41.6% 4,68090,877633 (12.6)814 (16.2)0.5Public
Yi Tao el al., “Adaptive Spatio-temporal Model Based Multiple Object Tracking Considering a Moving Camera[C]”, International Conference on Universal Village (UV), 2018.
eHAF16
39. using public detections
30.6
47.2
±16.8
52.418.6% 42.8% 12,58683,107542 (10.0)787 (14.5)0.5Public
H. Sheng, Y. Zhang, J. Chen, Z. Xiong, J. Zhang. Heterogeneous Association Graph Fusion for Target Association in Multiple Object Tracking. In IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology, 2018.
AMIR
40. online method using public detections
34.3
47.2
±7.7
46.314.0% 41.6% 2,68192,856774 (15.8)1,675 (34.1)1.0Public
A. Sadeghian, A. Alahi, S. Savarese. Tracking The Untrackable: Learning To Track Multiple Cues with Long-Term Dependencies. In ICCV, 2017.
TrackerAvg RankMOTAIDF1MTMLFPFNID Sw.FragHzDetector
MCjoint
41. using public detections
29.3
47.1
±10.8
52.320.4% 46.9% 6,70389,368370 (7.3)598 (11.7)0.6Public
}@article{DBLP:journals/corr/KeuperTYABS16, author = {Margret Keuper and Siyu Tang and Zhongjie Yu and Bjoern Andres and Thomas Brox and Bernt Schiele}, title = {A Multi-cut Formulation for Joint Segmentation and Tracking of Multiple Objects}, journal = {CoRR}, volume = {abs/1607.06317}, year = {2016}, url = {http://arxiv.org/abs/1607.06317}, timestamp = {Wed, 07 Jun 2017 14:41:31 +0200}, biburl = {http://dblp.uni-trier.de/rec/bib/journals/corr/KeuperTYABS16}, bibsource = {dblp computer science bibliography, http://dblp.org} }
NOMT
42. using public detections
27.9
46.4
±9.9
53.318.3% 41.4% 9,75387,565359 (6.9)504 (9.7)2.6Public
W. Choi. Near-Online Multi-target Tracking with Aggregated Local Flow Descriptor. In ICCV, 2015.
JMC
43. using public detections
34.6
46.3
±9.0
46.315.5% 39.7% 6,37390,914657 (13.1)1,114 (22.2)0.8Public
S. Tang, B. Andres, M. Andriluka, B. Schiele. Multi-Person Tracking by Multicuts and Deep Matching. In BMTT, 2016.
DD_TAMA16
44. online method using public detections
30.5
46.2
±8.4
49.414.1% 44.0% 5,12692,367598 (12.1)1,127 (22.8)6.5Public
Y. Yoon, D. Kim, K. Yoon, Y. Song, M. Jeon. Online Multiple Pedestrian Tracking using Deep Temporal Appearance Matching Association. In arXiv:1907.00831, 2019.
DMAN
45. online method using public detections
33.7
46.1
±11.1
54.817.4% 42.7% 7,90989,874532 (10.5)1,616 (31.9)0.3Public
J. Zhu, H. Yang, N. Liu, M. Kim, W. Zhang, M. Yang. Online Multi-Object Tracking with Dual Matching Attention Networks. In ECCV, 2018.
STAM16
46. online method using public detections
41.7
46.0
±9.1
50.014.6% 43.6% 6,89591,117473 (9.5)1,422 (28.4)0.2Public
Q. Chu, W. Ouyang, H. Li, X. Wang, B. Liu, N. Yu. Online Multi-object Tracking Using CNN-Based Single Object Tracker with Spatial-Temporal Attention Mechanism. In 2017 IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), 2017.
deepS2
47. using public detections
32.8
46.0
±8.2
46.515.5% 42.6% 5,12492,697693 (14.1)759 (15.4)0.7Public
ID 32
RAR16pub
48. online method using public detections
42.8
45.9
±9.7
48.813.2% 41.9% 6,87191,173648 (13.0)1,992 (39.8)0.9Public
K. Fang, Y. Xiang, X. Li, S. Savarese. Recurrent Autoregressive Networks for Online Multi-Object Tracking. In The IEEE Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision (WACV), 2018.
MHT_DAM
49. using public detections
35.8
45.8
±8.9
46.116.2% 43.2% 6,41291,758590 (11.9)781 (15.7)0.8Public
C. Kim, F. Li, A. Ciptadi, J. Rehg. Multiple Hypothesis Tracking Revisited. In ICCV, 2015.
MTDF
50. online method using public detections
46.8
45.7
±11.2
40.114.1% 36.4% 12,01884,9701,987 (37.2)3,377 (63.2)1.5Public
Z. Fu, F. Angelini, J. Chambers, S. Naqvi. Multi-Level Cooperative Fusion of GM-PHD Filters for Online Multiple Human Tracking. In IEEE Transactions on Multimedia, 2019.
TrackerAvg RankMOTAIDF1MTMLFPFNID Sw.FragHzDetector
INTERA_MOT
51. using public detections
32.3
45.4
±8.6
47.718.1% 38.7% 13,40785,547600 (11.3)930 (17.5)4.3Public
L. Lan, X. Wang, S. Zhang, D. Tao, W. Gao, T. Huang. Interacting Tracklets for Multi-object Tracking. In IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, 2018.
EDMT
52. using public detections
34.4
45.3
±9.1
47.917.0% 39.9% 11,12287,890639 (12.3)946 (18.3)1.8Public
J. Chen, H. Sheng, Y. Zhang, Z. Xiong. Enhancing Detection Model for Multiple Hypothesis Tracking. In BMTT-PETS CVPRw, 2017.
DCCRF16
53. online method using public detections
42.2
44.8
±9.8
39.714.1% 42.3% 5,61394,133968 (20.0)1,378 (28.5)0.1Public
H. Zhou, W. Ouyang, J. Cheng, X. Wang, H. Li. Deep Continuous Conditional Random Fields with Asymmetric Inter-object Constraints for Online Multi-object Tracking. In IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology, 2018.
TBSS
54. online method using public detections
44.0
44.6
±9.3
42.612.3% 43.9% 4,13696,128790 (16.7)1,419 (30.0)3.0Public
X. Zhou, P. Jiang, Z. Wei, H. Dong, F. Wang. Online Multi-Object Tracking with Structural Invariance Constraint. In BMVC, 2018.
QuadMOT16
55. using public detections
43.3
44.1
±9.4
38.314.6% 44.9% 6,38894,775745 (15.5)1,096 (22.8)1.8Public
J. Son, M. Baek, M. Cho, B. Han. Multi-Object Tracking with Quadruplet Convolutional Neural Networks. In CVPR, 2017.
CDA_DDALv2
56. online method using public detections
41.9
43.9
±7.8
45.110.7% 44.4% 6,45095,175676 (14.1)1,795 (37.6)0.5Public
S. Bae and K. Yoon, Confidence-Based Data Association and Discriminative Deep Appearance Learning for Robust Online Multi-Object Tracking , In IEEE TPAMI, 2017.
LFNF16
57. using public detections
44.8
43.6
±11.0
41.613.3% 45.7% 6,61695,363836 (17.5)938 (19.7)0.6Public
Sheng H, Hao L, Chen J, et al. Robust Local Effective Matching Model for Multi-Target Tracking. In PCM, 2017
oICF
58. online method using public detections
43.6
43.2
±10.2
49.311.3% 48.5% 6,65196,515381 (8.1)1,404 (29.8)0.4Public
H. Kieritz, S. Becker, W. Hübner, M. Arens. Online Multi-Person Tracking using Integral Channel Features. In IEEE Advanced Video and Signal-based Surveillance (AVSS) 2016, 2016.
MHT_bLSTM6
59. using public detections
44.4
42.1
±9.7
47.814.9% 44.4% 11,63793,172753 (15.4)1,156 (23.6)1.8Public
C. Kim, F. Li, J. Rehg. Multi-object Tracking with Neural Gating Using Bilinear LSTM. In ECCV, 2018.
OST16
60. online method using public detections
47.3
41.5
±9.2
39.110.7% 45.6% 5,91999,7091,056 (23.3)1,487 (32.8)4.7Public
Anonymous submission
TrackerAvg RankMOTAIDF1MTMLFPFNID Sw.FragHzDetector
LINF1
61. using public detections
41.2
41.0
±9.5
45.711.6% 51.3% 7,89699,224430 (9.4)963 (21.1)4.2Public
L. Fagot-Bouquet, R. Audigier, Y. Dhome, F. Lerasle. Improving Multi-Frame Data Association with Sparse Representations for Robust Near-Online Multi-Object Tracking. In ECCV, 2016.
PHD_GSDL16
62. online method using public detections
48.0
41.0
±8.9
43.111.3% 41.5% 6,49899,2571,810 (39.7)3,650 (80.1)8.3Public
Z. Fu, P. Feng, F. Angelini, J. Chambers, S. Naqvi. Particle PHD Filter based Multiple Human Tracking using Online Group-Structured Dictionary Learning. In IEEE Access, 2018.
PMPTracker
63. online method using public detections
50.0
40.3
±11.7
38.210.4% 42.0% 10,07197,5241,343 (28.9)2,764 (59.4)148.0Public
Light version of PTZ camera Mutiple People Tracker
AM_ADM
64. online method using public detections
44.5
40.1
±10.1
43.87.1% 46.2% 8,50399,891789 (17.5)1,736 (38.4)5.8Public
S. Lee, M. Kim, S. Bae, Learning Discriminative Appearance Models for Online Multi-Object Tracking with Appearance Discriminability Measures, In IEEE Access, 2018.
D_cost16
65. online method using public detections
39.0
39.9
±9.1
35.38.7% 50.2% 1,133107,586790 (19.3)824 (20.1)8.5Public
Anonymous submission
EAMTT_pub
66. online method using public detections
46.1
38.8
±8.5
42.47.9% 49.1% 8,114102,452965 (22.0)1,657 (37.8)11.8Public
R. Sanchez-Matilla, F. Poiesi, A. Cavallaro "Multi-target tracking with strong and weak detections" in BMTT ECCVw 2016
OVBT
67. online method using public detections
59.1
38.4
±8.8
37.87.5% 47.3% 11,51799,4631,321 (29.1)2,140 (47.1)0.3Public
Y. Ban, S. Ba, X. Alameda-Pineda, R. Horaud. Tracking Multiple Persons Based on a Variational Bayesian Model. In BMTT 2016, .
HAM_ACT16
68. online method using public detections
40.0
38.1
±8.2
43.37.8% 54.4% 6,976105,434418 (9.9)707 (16.8)8.0Public
GMMCP
69. using public detections
51.2
38.1
±7.8
35.58.6% 50.9% 6,607105,315937 (22.2)1,669 (39.5)0.5Public
A. Dehghan, S. Assari, M. Shah.. GMMCP-Tracker:Globally Optimal Generalized Maximum Multi Clique Problem for Multiple Object Tracking. In CVPR, 2015.
LTTSC-CRF
70. using public detections
49.8
37.6
±9.9
42.19.6% 55.2% 11,969101,343481 (10.8)1,012 (22.8)0.6Public
N. Le, A. Heili, M. Odobez. Long-Term Time-Sensitive Costs for CRF-Based Tracking by Detection. In ECCVw, 2016.
TrackerAvg RankMOTAIDF1MTMLFPFNID Sw.FragHzDetector
JCmin_MOT
71. online method using public detections
42.0
36.7
±9.1
36.27.5% 54.4% 2,936111,890667 (17.3)831 (21.5)14.8Public
M. Abhijeet Boragule. Joint Cost Minimization for Multi-Object Tracking. In 2017 IEEE International Conference on Advanced Vide and Signale Based Surveillance, 2017.
HISP_T
72. online method using public detections
52.4
35.9
±8.5
28.97.8% 50.1% 6,412107,9182,594 (63.6)2,298 (56.3)4.8Public
N. Baisa. Online Multi-target Visual Tracking using a HISP Filter. In Proceedings of the 13th International Joint Conference on Computer Vision, Imaging and Computer Graphics Theory and Applications - Volume 5: VISAPP,, 2018.
LP2D
73. using public detections
44.9
35.7
±10.1
34.28.7% 50.7% 5,084111,163915 (23.4)1,264 (32.4)49.3Public
MOT baseline: Linear programming on 2D image coordinates.
GM_PHD_DAL
74. online method using public detections
53.1
35.1
±9.1
26.67.0% 51.4% 2,350111,8864,047 (104.8)5,338 (138.2)3.5Public
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/333521185_Online_Multi-object_Visual_Tracking_using_a_GM-PHD_Filter_with_Deep_Appearance_Learning
GM_PHD_Dl
75. online method using public detections
54.0
34.3
±9.1
20.57.1% 51.5% 2,350111,8865,605 (145.1)5,357 (138.7)3.5Public
Anonymous submission
RNN_A_P
76. online method using public detections
57.1
34.0
±8.6
33.77.9% 51.0% 8,562109,2692,479 (61.9)3,393 (84.7)19.7Public
Anonymous submission
GM_PHD_e17
77. online method using public detections
54.5
33.8
±8.9
25.36.3% 54.9% 1,766115,1303,778 (102.5)3,874 (105.1)3.3Public
Anonymous submission
TBD
78. using public detections
59.6
33.7
±9.2
0.07.2% 54.2% 5,804112,5872,418 (63.2)2,252 (58.9)1.3Public
A. Geiger, M. Lauer, C. Wojek, C. Stiller, R. Urtasun. 3D Traffic Scene Understanding from Movable Platforms. In Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence (PAMI), 2014.
GM_PHD_N1T
79. online method using public detections
52.6
33.3
±8.9
25.55.5% 56.0% 1,750116,4523,499 (96.8)3,594 (99.5)9.9Public
N. Baisa, A. Wallace. Development of a N-type GM-PHD filter for multiple target, multiple type visual tracking. In Journal of Visual Communication and Image Representation, 2019.
CEM
80. using public detections
48.0
33.2
±7.9
0.07.8% 54.4% 6,837114,322642 (17.2)731 (19.6)0.3Public
A. Milan, S. Roth, K. Schindler. Continuous Energy Minimization for Multitarget Tracking. In IEEE TPAMI, 2014.
TrackerAvg RankMOTAIDF1MTMLFPFNID Sw.FragHzDetector
CppSORT
81. online method using public detections
48.2
31.5
±9.0
27.74.3% 59.9% 3,048120,2781,587 (46.6)2,239 (65.8)687.1Public
S. Murray. Real-Time Multiple Object Tracking - A Study on the Importance of Speed. In arXiv preprint arXiv:1709.03572, 2017.
GMPHD_HDA
82. online method using public detections
42.9
30.5
±6.9
33.44.6% 59.7% 5,169120,970539 (16.0)731 (21.7)13.6Public
Y. Song, M. Jeon. Online Multiple Object Tracking with the Hierarchically Adopted GM-PHD Filter using Motion and Appearance. In IEEE/IEIE The International Conference on Consumer Electronics (ICCE) Asia, 2016.
SMOT
83. using public detections
67.1
29.7
±7.3
0.05.3% 47.7% 17,426107,5523,108 (75.8)4,483 (109.3)0.2Public
C. Dicle, O. Camps, M. Sznaier. The Way They Move: Tracking Targets with Similar Appearance. In ICCV, 2013.
DCOR
84. online method using public detections
48.3
28.3
±9.0
21.73.4% 63.9% 1,618128,345849 (28.7)2,592 (87.5)32.9Public
Anonymous submission
MHT_ReID
85. using public detections
47.6
27.1
±47.2
36.430.6% 31.4% 13,068118,8291,071 (30.8)1,141 (32.8)0.5Public
Anonymous submission
JPDA_m
86. using public detections
42.8
26.2
±6.1
0.04.1% 67.5% 3,689130,549365 (12.9)638 (22.5)22.2Public
H. Rezatofighi, A. Milan, Z. Zhang, Q. Shi, A. Dick, I. Reid. Joint Probabilistic Data Association Revisited. In ICCV, 2015.
DP_NMS
87. using public detections
41.3
26.2
±9.3
31.24.1% 67.5% 3,689130,557365 (12.9)638 (22.5)5.9Public
H. Pirsiavash, D. Ramanan, C. Fowlkes. Globally-Optimal Greedy Algorithms for Tracking a Variable Number of Objects. In CVPR, 2011.
test_trker
88. using public detections new
44.8
0.0
±0.0
0.00.0% 100.0% 7182,3260 (nan)0 (nan)22.3Public
Anonymous submission

Due to a minor bug in the export script, all results were re-evaluated on April 11, 2016. Here is the old snapshot of the leaderboard.


Benchmark Statistics

SequencesFramesTrajectoriesBoxes
75919759182326

Difficulty Analysis

Sequence difficulty (from easiest to hardest, measured by average MOTA)

MOT16-03

MOT16-03

(51.4% MOTA)

MOT16-06

MOT16-06

(44.6% MOTA)

MOT16-07

MOT16-07

(38.2% MOTA)

...

...

MOT16-08

MOT16-08

(29.9% MOTA)

MOT16-14

MOT16-14

(24.3% MOTA)


Evaluation Measures

Lower is better. Higher is better.
Measure Better Perfect Description
Avg Rank lower 1 This is the rank of each tracker averaged over all present evaluation measures.
MOTA higher 100 % Multiple Object Tracking Accuracy [1]. This measure combines three error sources: false positives, missed targets and identity switches.
MOTP higher 100 % Multiple Object Tracking Precision [1]. The misalignment between the annotated and the predicted bounding boxes.
IDF1 higher 100 % ID F1 Score [2]. The ratio of correctly identified detections over the average number of ground-truth and computed detections.
FAF lower 0 The average number of false alarms per frame.
MT higher 100 % Mostly tracked targets. The ratio of ground-truth trajectories that are covered by a track hypothesis for at least 80% of their respective life span.
ML lower 0 % Mostly lost targets. The ratio of ground-truth trajectories that are covered by a track hypothesis for at most 20% of their respective life span.
FP lower 0 The total number of false positives.
FN lower 0 The total number of false negatives (missed targets).
ID Sw. lower 0 The total number of identity switches. Please note that we follow the stricter definition of identity switches as described in [3].
Frag lower 0 The total number of times a trajectory is fragmented (i.e. interrupted during tracking).
Hz higher Inf. Processing speed (in frames per second excluding the detector) on the benchmark.

Legend

Symbol Description
online method This is an online (causal) method, i.e. the solution is immediately available with each incoming frame and cannot be changed at any later time.
using public detections This method used the provided detection set as input.
new This entry has been submitted or updated less than a week ago.

References:


[1] Bernardin, K. & Stiefelhagen, R. Evaluating Multiple Object Tracking Performance: The CLEAR MOT Metrics. Image and Video Processing, 2008(1):1-10, 2008.
[2] Ristani, E., Solera, F., Zou, R., Cucchiara, R. & Tomasi, C. Performance Measures and a Data Set for Multi-Target, Multi-Camera Tracking. In ECCV workshop on Benchmarking Multi-Target Tracking, 2016.
[3] Li, Y., Huang, C. & Nevatia, R. Learning to associate: HybridBoosted multi-target tracker for crowded scene. In Proceedings of the IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2009.